As France prepares to take the EU helm on 1 July, Jos Delbeke, the deputy director in charge of climate change policy at the European Commission, is cautiously optimistic about the chances of finding an agreement before the end of the year.
"I see two good elements. First, there is a strong political commitment by the French," says Delbeke. Second, he adds, is that a lot has already been achieved since the Commission tabled its climate and energy proposals on 23 January. "The basic architecture of the proposal has been endorsed, not by everybody but by an overwhelming majority," he says.
"We knew there wasn't that much time but I am impressed about how much has already been done and I am impressed as well by how many things have already been cleared up."
In March 2007, heads of state and government of the 27-member bloc pledged to cut their CO2 emissions by an overall 20% by 2020 in an attempt to curb global warming. The Commission followed up in January this year with a package of measures that outlines how the 20% figure is to be shared between member states.
But problems soon emerged when it came to the details. Earlier this month, a group of seven Eastern European countries, led by Hungary, asked for a revision of their national emissions reduction targets for CO2 (EurActiv 02/06/08). They argued that by choosing 2005 as the reference year for basing its calculations, the Commission was favouring the richer, older members of the EU. Instead, they said 1990 should be chosen as the reference year because it better reflects the emissions cuts that followed post-communist de-industrialisation.
Hungarian proposal has 'major drawbacks'
Delbeke, however, rejects the idea, saying it may sound attractive but in fact has "major drawbacks".
"If you go for 1990 […], then you will bring in a lot of 'hot air'. De facto, this means that new member states would not have to do anything in terms of policy on energy efficiency, renewables, carbon dioxide reduction, etc. And it's hard to accept that because there is a lot of scope for improvement also in those member states in terms of housing insulation, transport, old technologies in industrial installation, and so on."
Regarding Polish claims that a revision of the EU emissions trading scheme would fire up energy prices by over 100%, Delbeke is equally uncompromising. "The figures are exaggerated. There is an impact on the price of electricity but we do not see such a high price impact."
Rather, Delbeke argues, Poland is now paying the price for failing to modernise its power generation sector over the last decade. He also blames regulated electricity prices for delaying much-needed investment in the sector.
"The electricity prices of Poland today are regulated, are much lower than for example in Germany. And now Poland is paying the price for it. If you want to have investment in the sector, it has to happen now because demand is increasing [and] old equipment is still in place," he says.
Please click here to read the full interview transcript (which covers: the ETS revision; CDMs under the post-Kyoto regime; CO2 emissions from cars and the prospect of a climate deal after the US elections).
